MEA seeks to allay fuel fears, says it's binding

ET Bureau|

Sep 13, 2008, 02.23 AM IST

0Comments

NEW DELHI: India said that the 123 agreement, including all its provisions, is legally binding on the US even as President George Bush���s observations to the US Congress that the guarantees are ``not legally binding������ unleashed a political storm here.

To add to the woes of the government, US media reports claimed that NSG members had privately decided to not sell sensitive technology to India.

On fuel supply assurances, Mr Bush���s letter to the Congress saying that the clause on fuel supply assurances is not legally binding on the US has clearly shown that there are key areas on which India and the US are clearly not on the same page.

The MEA official spokesperson in a statement on Friday said that the nuclear agreement would be guided solely by 123 Agreement, which would become a legal document once it is signed by both parties implying that the fuel supply guarantees will be legally binding on the US.

Refusing to directly comment on the Bush note, MEA spokesperson said: ``The rights and obligations of both India and the US are clearly spelt out in the terms and provisions of the 123 Agreement. Once this inter-governmental agreement enters into force, the agreement would become a legal document in accordance with well-recognised principles of international law and the Law of Treaties.������ The spokesperson further said that cooperation would be carried out ``on the basis of the respective rights and obligations of the two sides as contained in the agreement.������

The inclusion of fuel supply guarantees in the 123 Agreement was repeatedly highlighted as a key triumph of the Indian negotiators. Officials said that the 123 agreement clearly states that the US is responsible for fuel supply guarantees even if it ends cooperation with India for any reasons. Further the 123 agreement states that the US will also work with allies to get ���full access to the international fuel market, including reliable, uninterrupted and continual access to fuel supplies from firms in several nations.���

But the Indian reading runs completely contrary to the US understanding of fuel supply guarantees. President Bush���s observation on fuel supply guarantees in his determination to the US Congress introducing the nuclear package has put the Indian establishment in a quandary. The Indian side has always linked safeguards in perpetuity to fuel assurances for the lifetime of each reactor.

A state department note, which was released before the NSG meet, had also given the same interpretation of the guarantees. That note had clearly stated that the US would stop all cooperation and fuel assurances in the 123 agreement would become null and void if India tested a weapon. Though officials had said at the time also that the matter would be taken up at a ``political level,������ US ambassador to India David Mulford had said that there was no intimation from the Indian side on this matter. He had further said that there were no inconsistencies in the US position on fuel supply guarantees.

But the Indian government might need to seek clarification on other points also. A report in the Washington Post said that the NSG had privately agreed that none of its members would sell sensitive technology to India. The report quoting ``sources familiar with the discussions������ said that this decision was taken to persuade the naysayers to agree on granting a waiver for India.

���In the discussions about how to handle enrichment and reprocessing, it was made clear that nobody had any plans to transfer such technologies to India in the foreseeable future,��� an unnamed senior US official was quoted as saying in the report.

The NSG waiver itself says that members would ���exercise restraint in the transfer of sensitive facilities, technology and material usable for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.������

The report said that apart from this private agreement, the grouping was also moving towards initiating a total ban on sale of sensitive items to non-NPT countries which would include India.

``The agreement undercuts one of the Indian government���s key rationales for seeking a civilian nuclear deal with the United States ��� that it would open the door for ���full civil nuclear cooperation��� with the rest of the world,������ the report said.